Well I agree that you have to be practical. I would take a player with smaller wattage if he is not much smaller and he fit a position of need. I'm not talking about Brady Quinn right now; I don't get the sense he is standing out above the other players in a big way.
If there was a Dan Marino type there, and he was head and shoulders above other players available at that spot, I would try to trade out of that spot for a team that is willing to offer a fair deal to draft him. If there wasn't such a deal, I would consider drafting him anyway, knowing that he can be traded when the time is right later on. If I thought it wouldn't work out in the long run and we wouldn't get the value, then I wouldn't draft him.
It's not the most talented player necessarily, but to me it's the one who can give my team the most wattage in the long run by drafting him - whether he gets traded later, or other players do, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012
But in our case, taking the next Dan Marino might only provide a minor upgrade to Campbell. Remember, Campbell is 2 years ahead of any QB we take this year in experience. Also, his college production suggests that, barring serious injury, he will be a top 10, maybe 5 QB in this league by 2008. Sure, if Brady Quinn was the next Dan Marino (he's not going to be as good Marino, but its a decent loose comparision considering hes the best thing in this draft), he's going to end up being better than Campbell when he gets close to his prime 4 years down the road, but we are talking about 2010 now. Generally, you don't make a top 10 selection at the QB position who doesn't project to be the best QB on your roster until 2010. Brady Quinn is going to be a great pickup for somebody, but for us he would essentially be a waste of a pick unless Campbell were to get critically injured.
And just because Brady Quinn or Laron Landry falls to us does not mean that Amobi Okoye is 1/4 the player. A more accurate comparision would be that Quinn or Landry are worth 1000 Watts, and Okoye is worth 850. And then when you factor in need and some of the special things about Okoye, it becomes very clear who the best pick for the Washington Redskins is.
I understand what you are saying about maximizing your value, but for us to take a quarterback would be about the farthest thing from maximizing our value. You have to look at needs down the road as the player you take hits his prime.
Will defensive line be a need down the road? Yes, an absolutely critical one? Will middle linebacker? Yes. Will outside linebacker? Not really.
Cornerback? Somewhat. A lot of that depends on Rogers taking his game to the next level.
Safety? Only if Sean Taylor continues to be a giant liability in coverage (to the point where we need to replace him to stop opponents).
Offensive Line? Yes.
Tight End? If we keep Cooley around, we won't need to use a day 1 pick on a TE for many years.
Wide Receiver? In a year or two, we might need to bring in another proven, competant body. This will not be a critical need until Moss gets too old to produce.
Running Back? Not in the forseeable future.
Using this method of discovering our true needs, Quarterback actually appears to be the most secure position for the forseeable future. Only a career threatening or development threatening injury to Campbell would make this a need. Since it's illogical to bank on something of that nature, picking a QB would be minimizing draft value.
The new Dan Marino/Brady Quinn example would not have any trade value until we let him play enough to prove he can play in this league. It's not reasonable to take him under these circumstances.
Trading down is the most logical option to deal with the value discrepency. Value is relative to team. This also makes trading down difficult. So sometimes, trading down is impossible, and you just have to let that "can't miss" prospect fall past you. We did this with Mike Williams in 2005 and while Carlos Rogers might not turn out to be a good pick, it still was a good decision to pass on Williams.
|